New Range Extension of Pomadasys andamanensis and Siganus fuscescens to Odisha Coast: Morphological and Molecular Evidence I InformativeBD

Bibarani Tripathy, from the institute of India. Surya N. Swain, from the institute of India. and Usha R. Acharya, from the institute of India. wrote a research article about, New Range Extension of Pomadasys andamanensis and Siganus fuscescens to Odisha Coast: Morphological and Molecular Evidence. Entitled, Morphological and molecular evidence for the first records and range extension of two marine fish species Pomadasys andamanensis and Siganus fuscescens to Odisha Coast, Bay of Bengal. This research paper published by the Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences (JBES). an open access scholarly research journal on Biodiversity. under the affiliation of the International Network For Natural Sciences | INNSpub. an open access multidisciplinary research journal publisher. 

 Abstract

Two specimens are from each of Pomadasys andamanensis (Mckay and Satapoomin) and Siganus fuscescens (Houttuyn) were collected from Gopalpur-on-sea, Odisha coast, Bay of Bengal. A study on conventional taxonomy interestingly demonstrates not only the first record of appearance of both the species, but also their inclusion to their respective species on the Odisha coast, Bay of Bengal. It was further, strengthened by molecular analysis through DNA barcoding which showed high confidence sequence similarity in their species identification. Moreover, the congruent clustering of both the species according to their morphological identification, strongly support the species identification through DNA barcoding. Above all, the generated time tree with regards to their origin largely agrees with other recent reports based on mitochondrial loci analysis indicates middle to early Miocene sub-epoch for Pomadasys andamanensis and for Siganus fuscescens it occurred sometimes in the late Pleistocene epoch. The migration of these reef-associated fishes is probably for their specific attraction to reef region of Bay of Bengal or/and ecological disturbances in their native region. The overall outcomes confirmed the first ever extensive range of occurrence of these two marine fish species on the Odisha coast, Bay of Bengal.

Read more : Taxonomic Analysis of Gastropod Snail Occurrence in Agroecosystems | InformativeBD

 Introduction

Biological diversity is rapidly inundating worldwide with unprecedented rates mostly due to human activities (Hubert and Hanner, 2015). Determining the extent to which unprecedented globalization and intensification of human-related threats affect biodiversity, either through the loss of species at particular sites or through changes in range size, requires accurate data on the species distribution (Gaston and Blackburn, 2000). Thus, precise taxonomic identification and delimitation of species is highly necessary for conservation and sustainable exploitation of natural resources and also paramount prerequisites to population genetic, physiological and ecological studies (Butlin et al., 2009). On the other hand, it is also important to know whether economic benefit estimates are stable over time, thus accurate identification of species is additionally consequential for their protection (Lew and Wallmo, 2017). 

It is imperative that the ichthyofauna of Bay of Bengal have been well studied for effective conservation and resource management. The Bay of Bengal is the largest marine ecosystem of the world, this pleasant environmental condition, seems to be responsible for introduction of large no of non-native invasive species (NIS). The new alien species are invaded to Bay of Bengal, because of growth, development, reproduction and exploiting the environment for further establishment of their population. Latest record shows that, the existence of invasive species such as Ulua mentalis, Pinjalo pinjalo, Tylosurus crocodilus, Cephalopholis formosa, and Myripristis jacobus to Bay of Bengal at different time period (Barik et al., 2018a, b, c; 2021).

Introduction of several types of marine aquatic noninvasive species may lead to declines or even extinctions of native species; create disturbances in marine ecosystems, increase the transmission of viruses and pathogens, and create significant damage to the flow of the food-chain (Simberloff et al., 2013). Concerns over marine and coastal ecosystems, NIS are being invaded to a new environment because of various human activities such as fisheries, shipping, ornamental and live seafood trades, opening and construction of canals, climate change, habitat modification and aquaculture sites, Marinas may act as hotspots for several aquatic marine biological invasion species and promote further establishment of NIS (Occhipinti-Ambrogi and Savini, 2003; Molnar et al., 2008; Williams et al., 2013). Successful establishment of NIS is due to the species characteristics such as broad range of physiological tolerance, rapid growth, polyphagy, high dispersal ability, high genetic variability, high phenotypic plasticity and human association have been put forward for expanding their range in a new habitat (Chan and Briski, 2017).

Once alien species arrived to a new habitat, these nonnative species must overcome all the physical barrier of geography and survive all the environmental conditions and establish a selfsustaining population (Blackburn et al., 2011). Marine Ecosystem that are tending to susceptible invasion of NIS invading the native habitat, have several criteria of environmental condition such as; few natural enemies, low species diversity, high environmental heterogeneity, a history of habitat disturbances (Levine et al., 2004; Fridley et al., 2007; Melbourne et al., 2007; Herborg et al., 2007; Clark and Johnston, 2011). In addition to that several evolutionary processes such as; genetic drift, adaptation, genetic bottleneck effect, selection and admixture can strongly influence the successful establishment of NIS and helps in proliferation inside a new environment (Sakai et al., 2001; Lee, 2002; Roman and Darling, 2007).

During recent centuries, a no. of nonnative marine fishes are invaded into Bay of Bengal causing community shift in their native habitat. This community shift results alter in species composition, which can indirectly change the structural properties of marine habitat. This change in species composition will provide information about ecological disturbance in both native and nonnative habitat (Scheffer et al., 2001; Scheffer and Carpenter, 2003). In order to find out the amount of change in species composition in a certain habitat, accurate and proper identification of fish species is a prime important work. Earlier studies show that, there are several methods are developed for species identification such as; classical morphotaxonomy, commercial technologies such as immunological assay and cytotaxonomy (Phillips and Ráb, 2001). Frequent change in phenotypic characters, relative costlier process and comparatively lack of expert knowledge are known to be the main drawbacks of earlier studies for species identification. In the recent past, DNA barcoding method has successfully implemented as a robust molecular tool for more accurate species identification (Hebert et al., 2003; Frézal and Leblois, 2008; Leray and Knowlton, 2015). Earlier studies have already proven that mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase-I (COI) is a highly conserved gene used as a barcode marker for most animal species identification (Hebert et al., 2003). The COI-based DNA Barcoding is the most authenticate and versatile method for species identification and have the ability to analyze high rates of sequence changes accompanied with intraspecific divergence at species level (Ivanova et al., 2012; Vences et al., 2012).

Haemulidae is one of the ten diverse, widespread and conspicuous families within the largest sub-order of teleost fishes, the Percoidei (Nelson et al., 2016). They are commonly called grunts, because of their ability to create uproarious sounds by rubbing their pharyngeal teeth together (Burkenroad, 1930). Haemulids have a tendency to congregate during the day and afterward spread out for scavenging around night. The family contains about 145 extant species currently classified in 19 nominal genera (Forese and Pauly, 2017) and grouped into two sub-families i.e. Haemulinae and Plectorhinchinae. The Haemulidae species are morphologically diversified fishes with wondrous and changeable coloration and inhabit the coastal waters in tropical, sub-tropical & temperate inshore reef areas of Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Ocean.

On the other hand, Rabbit fish (Family Siganidae that only include the genus Siganus) are morphologically very uniform group under global fish diversity of coral reefs of order Perciformes (Oh et al., 2007). The members of this family Siganidae are also known as spinefoot, demarcated by different characters like the arrangement of spines (Johnson and Gill, 1998) and exhibits uniform phenotypic characters (i.e. dorsal fins with 13 spines and 10 rays and anal fins with 7 spines and 9 rays). Fishes of the family siganids are the primary consumers of coral reefs and act as an active herbivore, exhibits important component in coral communities. The distribution pattern of family Siganidae is restricted to the Indian Ocean and East Andaman Sea, comprising of 29 nominal species (Froese and Pauly, 2017).

Herein we report recent biological invasion of two marine fishes namely banded grunter Pomadasys andamanensis and mottled spinefoot Siganus fuscescens from Odisha coast, Bay of Bengal, applying the identification of diagnostic morphological and meristic features and subsequently corroborated by DNA barcoding data using single gene marker mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase subunit-I (COI).

Reference

Arvedlund M. 2009. First records of unusual marine fish distributions—Can they predict climate changes? Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 89(4), 863-866. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0025315408003182

Barik TK, Swain SN, Sahu B, Tripathy B, Acharya UR. 2018a. First record of Tylosurus crocodilus (Péron & Lesueur, 1821) (Beloniformes: Belonidae) from Odisha coast, Bay of Bengal, India: exploration of a biological invasion using DNA barcoding. Thalassas: An International Journal of Marine Sciences 34(1), 209-217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41208-017-0046-5

Barik TK, Swain SN, Sahu B, Tripathy B, Acharya UR. 2018b. Morphological and genetic analyses of the first record of longrakered trevally, Ulua mentalis (Perciformes: Carangidae) and of the pinjalo snapper, Pinjalo pinjalo (Perciformes: Lutjanidae) in the Odisha coast, Bay of Bengal. Mitochondrial DNA Part A 29(4), 552-560. https://doi.org/10.1080/24701394.2018.1435562

Barik TK, Swain SN, Sahu B, Tripathy B, Acharya UR. 2018c. The first record of Cephalopholis formosa (Perciformes: Serranidae) from the marine waters of Odisha coast, Bay of Bengal, India. Journal of Ichthyology 58(5), 751-753. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0032945218050061

Barik TK, Swain SN, Sahu B, Tripathy B, Acharya UR. 2021. Molecular evidence for Myripristis jacobus and Scarus taeniopterus new to Bay of Bengal: Sporadic appearance or preliminary colonization? Marine Ecology 42(1), e12632. https://doi.org/10.1111/maec.12632

Bingpeng X, Heshan L, Zhilan Z, Chunguang W, Yanguo W, Jianjun W. 2018. DNA barcoding for identification of fish species in the Taiwan Strait. PLOS ONE 13(6), e0198109. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198109

Blackburn TM, Pyšek P, Bacher S, Carlton JT, Duncan RP, Jarošík V, Wilson JRU, Richardson DM. 2011. A proposed unified framework for biological invasions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 26(7), 333-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.03.023

Burkenroad MD. 1930. Sound production in the Haemulidae. Copeia 1930(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.2307/1436662

Butlin R, Bridle J, Schluter D. (Eds.). 2001. Speciation and patterns of diversity (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Chan FT, Briski E. 2017. An overview of recent research in marine biological invasions. Marine Biology 164(6), 121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-017-3155-4

Clare EL, Kerr KCR, Von Königslöw TE, Wilson JJ, Hebert PDN. 2008. Diagnosing mitochondrial DNA diversity: Applications of a sentinel gene approach. Journal of Molecular Evolution 66(4), 362-367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00239-008-9082-4

Clark GF, Johnston EL. 2011. Temporal change in the diversity-invasibility relationship in the presence of a disturbance regime: Temporal scale and invasion patterns. Ecology Letters 14(1), 52-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01558.x

Cowen RK, Paris CB, Srinivasan A. 2006. Scaling of connectivity in marine populations. Science 311(5760), 522-527. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1122039

Dineley DL, Metcalf SJ. 1999. Fossil fishes of Great Britain (1st ed.). Joint Nature Conservation Committee.

Frézal L, Leblois R. 2008. Four years of DNA barcoding: Current advances and prospects. Infection, Genetics and Evolution 8(5), 727-736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meegid.2008.05.005

Fricke R, Eschmeyer WN, van der Laan R. 2022. ESCHMEYER’S CATALOG OF FISHES: GENERA, SPECIES. Retrieved from: [World Wide Web Electronic Publication]. http://researcharchive.calacademy.org/research/ichthyology/catalog/fishcatmain.asp. Retrieved 2/10/2022.

Fridley JD, Stachowicz JJ, Naeem S, Sax DF, Seabloom EW, Smith MD, Stohlgren TJ, Tilman D, Holle BV. 2007. The invasion paradox: Reconciling pattern and process in species invasions. Ecology 88(1), 3-17. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2007)88[3:TIPRPA]2.0.CO;2

Froese R, Pauly D. 2017. Fish Base [World Wide Web Electronic Publication]. URL: www.fishbase.org. Retrieved 2/10/2022.

Gaston KJ, Blackburn TM. (Eds.). 2000. Pattern and process in macroecology (1st ed.). Wiley.

Green MR, Sambrook J, Sambrook J. 2012. Molecular cloning: A laboratory manual (4th ed.). Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.

Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL, deWaard JR. 2003. Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 270(1512), 313-321. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2218

Hebert PDN, Ratnasingham S, De Waard JR. 2003. Barcoding animal life: Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 divergences among closely related species. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 270(suppl_1), S96-S99. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2003.0022

Helaers R, Milinkovitch MC. 2010. MetaPIGA v2.0: Maximum likelihood large phylogeny estimation using the metapopulation genetic algorithm and other stochastic heuristics. BMC Bioinformatics 11(1), 379. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-11-379

Herborg L, Rudnick DA, Siliang Y, Lodge DM, MacISAAC HJ. 2007. Predicting the range of Chinese mitten crabs in Europe. Conservation Biology 21(5), 1316-1323. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00783.x

Hubert N, Hanner R. 2015. DNA Barcoding, species delineation and taxonomy: A historical perspective. DNA Barcodes 3(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1515/dna-2015-0001

Ivanova NV, Clare EL, Borisenko AV. 2012. DNA barcoding in mammals. In WJ Kress & DL Erickson (Eds.), DNA Barcodes, Humana Press 858, 153-182. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-61779-591-6_7

Johnson G, Gill A. 1998. Perches and their allies. In: Paxton JR, Eschmeyer WN, eds. Encyclopedia of Fishes. 2nd ed. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 225-229.

Kumar S, Stecher G, Li M, Knyaz C, Tamura K. 2018. Mega x: Molecular evolutionary genetics analysis across computing platforms. Molecular Biology and Evolution 35(6), 1547-1549. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msy096

Lee CE. 2002. Evolutionary genetics of invasive species. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 17(8), 386-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-5347(02)02554-5

Leray M, Knowlton N. 2015. DNA barcoding and metabarcoding of standardized samples reveal patterns of marine benthic diversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112(7), 2076-2081. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1424997112

Levine JM, Adler PB, Yelenik SG. 2004. A meta-analysis of biotic resistance to exotic plant invasions. Ecology Letters 7(10), 975-989. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2004.00657.x

Lew DK, Wallmo K. 2017. Temporal stability of stated preferences for endangered species protection from choice experiments. Ecological Economics 131, 87-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.08.018

Melbourne BA, Cornell HV, Davies KF, Dugaw CJ, Elmendorf S, Freestone AL, Hall RJ, Harrison S, Hastings A, Holland M, Holyoak M, Lambrinos J, Moore K, Yokomizo H. 2007. Invasion in a heterogeneous world: Resistance, coexistence or hostile takeover? Ecology Letters 10(1), 77-94. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00987.x

Molnar JL, Gamboa RL, Revenga C, Spalding MD. 2008. Assessing the global threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6(9), 485-492. https://doi.org/10.1890/070064

National Center for Biotechnology Information [World Wide Web Electronic Publication]. n.d. URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/.

Near TJ, Eytan RI, Dornburg A, Kuhn KL, Moore JA, Davis MP, Wainwright PC, Friedman M, Smith WL. 2012. Resolution of ray-finned fish phylogeny and timing of diversification. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109(34), 13698-13703. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1206625109

Nelson JS, Grande TC, Wilson MVH. 2016. Fishes of the world (1st ed.). Wiley.

Occhipinti-Ambrogi A, Savini D. 2003. Biological invasions as a component of global change in stressed marine ecosystems. Marine Pollution Bulletin 46(5), 542–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-326X(03)00061-0

Oh DJ, Kim JY, Lee JA, Yoon WJ, Park SY, Jung YH. 2007. Complete mitochondrial genome of the rabbitfish Siganus fuscescens (Perciformes, Siganidae): Full Length Research Paper. DNA Sequence 18(4), 295–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/10425170701483523

Palumbi SR. 2003. Population genetics, demographic connectivity, and the design of marine reserves. Ecological Applications 13, 146–158. https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-0761(2003)013[0146:PGDCAT]2.0.CO;2

Phillips R, Ráb P. 2001. Chromosome evolution in the Salmonidae (Pisces): An update. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 76(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1464793100005622

Roman J, Darling J. 2007. Paradox lost: Genetic diversity and the success of aquatic invasions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 22(9), 454–464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2007.07.002

Sakai AK, Allendorf FW, Holt JS, Lodge DM, Molofsky J, With KA, Baughman S, Cabin RJ, Cohen JE, Ellstrand NC, McCauley DE, O’Neil P, Parker IM, Thompson JN, Weller SG. 2001. The population biology of invasive species. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 32(1), 305–332. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.32.081501.114037

Scheffer M, Carpenter S, Foley JA, Folke C, Walker B. 2001. Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems. Nature 413(6856), 591–596. https://doi.org/10.1038/35098000

Scheffer M, Carpenter SR. 2003. Catastrophic regime shifts in ecosystems: Linking theory to observation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 18(12), 648–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2003.09.002

Simberloff D, Martin JL, Genovesi P, Maris V, Wardle DA, Aronson J, Courchamp F, Galil B, García-Berthou E, Pascal M, Pyšek P, Sousa R, Tabacchi E, Vilà M. 2013. Impacts of biological invasions: What’s what and the way forward. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 28(1), 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.07.013

Talwar PK, Kacker RK. 1984. Commercial Sea fishes of India. Calcutta, Zoological Survey of India.

Vences M, Nagy ZT, Sonet G, Verheyen E. 2012. DNA barcoding amphibians and reptiles. In WJ Kress & DL Erickson (Eds.), DNA Barcodes, Humana Press 858, 79–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-61779-591-6_6

Ward RD, Zemlak TS, Innes BH, Last PR, Hebert PDN. 2005. DNA barcoding Australia’s fish species. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 360(1462), 1847–1857. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1716

Williams SL, Davidson IC, Pasari JR, Ashton GV, Carlton JT, Crafton RE, Fontana RE, Grosholz ED, Miller AW, Ruiz GM, Zabin CJ. 2013. Managing multiple vectors for marine invasions in an increasingly connected world. BioScience 63, 952–966. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2013.63.12.8 

Source : Morphological and molecular evidence for the first records and range extension of two marine fishspecies Pomadasys andamanensis and Siganus fuscescens to Odisha Coast, Bay of Bengal